The Lake Champlain Bridge and Project Labor Agreements

(Photo courtesy of the New York State Department of Transportation.)

By Jeff Potvin

In these times of economic turbulence, it is truly disheartening to see respected organizations, such as the Associated General Contractors chapters in Vermont and New York, threatening to halt the Lake Champlain Bridge reconstruction with lawsuits and lies about Project Labor Agreements (PLA). As if the citizens of that region already haven’t had their lives turned upside down by the loss of a main transportation artery.

A pact between the owner and the contractors, Project Labor Agreements define acceptable terms and conditions of employment on a specific project. Wages, benefits, schedules, safety expectations and work rules are standardized up front to facilitate the smooth completion of the job on time and on budget. PLAs also foster a positive community impact by containing hire-local provisions, training and outreach programs. They are common around the country, and President Barack Obama endorsed their application on federal projects over $25 million in value – a threshold the Lake Champlain Bridge job far exceeds. There are well over 20 studies by academia that show PLAs deliver responsible economic development and do not drive up costs.

The AGC’s assertion that Project Labor Agreements effectively exclude non-union businesses from bidding the job is patently false. In reality, any contractor – union or non-union – can bid a PLA job. Successful bidders must agree to abide by the PLA for that particular project, including paying workers a family-supporting wage and decent benefits. Non-union contractors on a PLA job are not forced to unionize, and can continue “business as usual” on all other non-PLA projects they are a part of.

A PLA does not take away a non-union contractor’s authority to negotiate with her current employees. The fact is non-union employers already have monopoly bargaining power over their workers, all of whom are “at will” employees and frankly have little negotiating leverage as it is. “At will” employees can be terminated for any reason or no reason at all. What’s more, their terms and conditions of employment – including wages and benefits – can be altered for any reason, at any time, without notice. A PLA gives the worker much more stability and assures the public their money is being spent wisely.

Most alarming, the AGC feels a PLA will cause contractors to hire from elsewhere. Quite to the contrary, signatories to a PLA are typically required to pull from the regional workforce. After all, local workers who earn fair wages and benefits will in turn invest money back into the community – a win-win for everyone. Where was the AGC when the Richmond Bridge, Vermont’s first American Recovery and Reinvestment Act project, was built by an out-of-state contractor who was under no obligation to use local workers?

Clearly, the AGC’s objections really imply that union wages and benefits are generally better than non-union ones and their contractors are simply unwilling to work under a framework that sets socially responsible labor standards for a publicly funded project. They seemingly want to keep wages artificially low and remove any expectation from the public and the workforce of equitable treatment. It is imperative we not let this one-sided philosophy derail lawmakers and project administrators from doing the right thing – especially with our sputtering economy still causing so much angst for working people.

Jeff Potvin, a lifelong Vermonter and resident of North Hero, is president of the Vermont Building and Construction Trades Council, a partnership of 15 labor unions that represent several thousand workers. He is also business manager of UA Plumbers and Pipefitters Local 693, and serves on the State of Vermont Apprenticeship Council. Contact him at (802) 864-4042 or jeff@ualocal693.org.